The Museum I work in is a knowledge-based place: the facts, the verfiable claims, basically what has come to be regarded as a true by a critical mass of legitimized people. Knowledge reigns in the development of our projects. But there is a disconnect between this knowledge orientation and our visitors, the messages we aim to communicate to them and the exerpiences we try to create for them.
Our messages and experiences are understanding oriented. In other words, our messages never require that a visitor leave knowing the dates of an event, or what material an object was made from. Instead, we aim to have the visitor understand the relevance of the event or object within a context, like the evolution of a country or their own life.
There are a few points of tension with this difference. First off, have we made assumptions about what our visitors know about our subjects? When asked our current visitors often demonstrate very little knowledge (the way we define knowledge - as facts and truth about events or objects) We rarely ask non-visitors. We don't usually assess or evaluate knowledge acquired after a visit. Can understanding come without knowledge? Is knowledge temporary but understanding more lasting? How best can a knowledge based institution and exhibition communicate understanding based messages and experiences?
A few things I read today:
Reinventing the Museum
What is the Object of this Exercise? A Meandering Exploration of the Many Meanings of Objects in Museums, Elainne Heumann Gurian
Museum Management and Curatorship
Beyond the field trip: museum literacy and higher education
Carin Jacobs; Janine Andrews; M. Christine Castle; Nicolette Meister; William Green; Kristen Olson; Andrew Simpson; Rhianedd Smith
Excerpts from
Understanding by Design
Grant P. Wiggins, Jay McTighe
